Our common bonds

Having read David Goodhart (Discomfort of strangers, February 24) with considerable care, I feel he has created something of a mountain out of a false dichotomy - his wish to "resolve the tension between liberalism and pluralism". Assumpting that pluralism here refers to "group identities", there is surely no prospect of fully resolving this tension - particularly in what has been a multi-national polity from as long ago as the Celtic Cornish incorporation into Wessex in the mid-9th century. The best a liberal state can do is to work on an optimal balance between the needs of individuals, families and larger groups - including indigenous and now "non- indigenous" ethnicities.

The search for some seamless common culture is unattainable and probably always was (viz Ireland). But that degree of commonality is not required to sustain a viable modern state. The institutions of the state - parliament, NHS, education etc - coupled with the common language of English, a largely shared audio-visual media and the familiarity that domicile brings, should be adequate to sustain the necessary bonds between inhabitants. Indeed, on the whole, our society has been pretty successful in comparison with others in absorbing succeeding waves of newcomers. Most of us have mixed ancestry, myself included.

Goodhart might argue that his essay has prompted the government to move in a more "realistic liberal" direction on eastern European migrants. But hasn't "tough love" been the mantra of New Labour ever since David Owen founded the SDP? Simon PartridgeLondon

David Goodhart's disingenuous argument takes us back 40 years in its deliberate conflation of "immigrants" and "ethnic minorities" into an alien "other", supposedly at odds with the (never defined) "common culture" of the presumably white majority. The end result is the suggestion that Asian and black people - no matter how long we have lived in Britain - can never be unequivocally British.

Presumably, given sport remains one of the few cultural arenas with a shared sense of national belonging, Goodhart would agree with other rightwing commentators in suggesting the England teams should similarly avoid having too many brown and black faces in their ranks to prevent cultural fragmentation. Ben CarringtonEastbourne, E Sussex

I know many people in this part of the world who are committed "multiculturalists". To do this, they seem to need to live in well-off white areas. It also seems to entail going to extraordinary lengths to avoid sending their children to any of the schools in or near to these areas. They do, however, seem to have good knowledge of where the best curries are to be had. Kevin ParkerKeighley, W Yorks

David Goodhart is not a racist, but he seems to have a preoccupation with race. He refers to cultural norms and common standards over and above the rule of law, without telling us what they are. It is fair to put the onus back on to Goodhart: let him show that he's not saying that people who look foreign should keep their heads down until "we" decide they're not "immigrants" any more. That's not a personal slur; that's what "we" all used to believe, isn't it? Patrick MorrowManchester